Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure
Subject : Civil Law - Fatal Accident Claims
Description :
The Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) has intervened in a significant liability dispute between a state-owned power distribution company and the family of a deceased individual. Justice Ashutosh Kumar, presiding over a civil first appeal, has granted a conditional stay on a trial court decree that initially awarded over Rs 13 lakh in compensation.
The case arises from a tragic incident involving the family of the late Shri Rajiv. His widow, Smt. Vinod Kumari, along with her minor son and mother-in-law, initiated a civil suit under the Fatal Accident Act, 1855 , against Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (AVVNL).
Following the proceedings in the Court of the Additional District Judge No. 3, Jaipur, the trial court delivered a verdict on October 13, 2025. The court found partial merit in the claimants' suit and awarded a total compensation of Rs 13,32,592, coupled with an interest rate of 9% per annum. Dissatisfied with this decision, AVVNL approached the High Court under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) to challenge the judgment and decree.
In its appeal, AVVNL sought an immediate stay on the operation of the trial court’s decree. Appearing for the appellant, counsel argued for the suspension of the payment mandate while the appellate case remains sub judice.
The High Court accepted the maintainability of the appeal and focused its immediate attention on the request for a stay. Recognizing the need to balance the legal rights of the power distribution utility to challenge the adverse decree against the immediate needs of the bereaved claimants, the Court adopted a standard middle-ground approach often seen in high-value civil litigation.
The Court’s order emphasized financial security for the respondents while ensuring the appellant's right to pursue the appeal:
By mandating a 50% deposit, the Rajasthan High Court has ensured that the family is shielded from total hardship while the legal merits of the compensation award are scrutinized. The respondents must provide an undertaking that they will refund the money, with 9% interest, should the Nigam eventually win its appeal. The court has summoned the records of the trial court and listed the matter for further hearing in eight weeks, marking the next stage in this high-stakes liability battle.
View the social posts created for this story.
compensation - liability - negligence - electricity - indemnity - decree
#FatalAccidentAct #RajasthanHighCourt
Supreme Court Rules Criminal Courts Must Not Act As Recovery Agents For Disputed Dues
27 Jul 2026
Rajya Sabha Bill Seeks To Criminalize Vande Mataram Disruption Under The National Honour Act
27 Jul 2026
Will Competitive Exams Deplete Delhi District Courts of Judges During Crucial Trial Proceedings This Year?
27 Jul 2026
Bombay High Court Adjourns Defamation Case Involving Union Minister Nitin Gadkari And Online Media Platforms
28 Jul 2026
Rajasthan High Court Directs State to Form Separate Wings for Crime Investigation and Security
28 Jul 2026
Gujarat High Court Upholds Constitutionality Of CGST Section 16 2 c Denying Unpaid Input Tax
28 Jul 2026
Punjab and Haryana High Court Issues New Guidelines For Legal Aid Defense Counsel System
28 Jul 2026
Government Introduces Public Examinations Amendment Bill 2026 In Lok Sabha To Curb Exam Paper Leaks
28 Jul 2026
Should Delhi High Court Increase Pecuniary Jurisdiction of District Courts to ₹10 Crore Threshold?
28 Jul 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.